On Jun 1, 2010, at 12:58, Alex Danilo wrote:
>> In any case, whatever incompleteness there might be is so small that it doesn't make any sense at all not to treat HTML5 as completely SVG-relevant as-is right now. You can see that http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/ParserIssues is pretty short. I realize that REC might be a bit further away, but it would be folly for the SVG WG to treat HTML5 as vaporware until it's "done" from the Process perspective.
> So IMHO it fits the description of vapourware until someone actually implements
> all of the parts of a very comprehensive and complex spec.
I disagree, but the status of the whole spec is beside the point.
What matters in the context of the SVG WG is that the parts relevant to SVG integration have been specced and implemented (in a browser and in a validator). Thus, SVG-in-HTML5 is ahead of an HTML(4)+SVG integration profile, which *is* vaporware.
--
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fihttp://hsivonen.iki.fi/